Sam Rawlins
Sam Rawlins
> While I'm usually one of the first to complain about things in my API that I don't want to be there, this one really doesn't irk me at all....
I think we can close this, since the declaring-constructor proposal will allow the in-body initializers that @eernstg indicates above.
CC @johnniwinther @scheglov Either correct or incorrect behavior in parsing `[]==` I think 😅 . I'm not sure which.
@NightOwlCoder sorry for the extreme delay. Do you mean the calls between isolates, on SendPort/RecievePort objects, or network calls made from child isolates / isolate groups?
Without the details requested [here](https://github.com/flutter/devtools/issues/8380#issuecomment-2392346295) and [here](https://github.com/flutter/devtools/issues/8380#issuecomment-2393929155), we cannot answer further. [Ben's answer](https://github.com/flutter/devtools/issues/8380#issuecomment-2393929155) is probably the answer.
Making stager compatible with analyzer 8 or 9 is probably an hour or two exercise; that might be a good stopgap while we investigate whether we can avoid stager.
Should we close this, @elliette ? Or continue the discussion of our dependency on stager?
Reduced to P2.
Greetings! still on my radar.
Greetings! Yes, still is. Might squeak it in before the quarter is over.